|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org 
|> [mailto:dns-bounces+dassa=dhs.org§dotau.org] On Behalf Of 
|> Deus Ex Machina
|> Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2005 10:10 AM
|> To: .au DNS Discussion List
|> Subject: Re: [DNS] Cybersquatting and secondary market
|> 
|> Dirk Hunter [DirkH§stjohnqld.com.au] wrote:
|> 
|> > I definitely do not think that the restrictions on 
|> requirements for 
|> > registrations (whether it be Aust citizen/resident for .id.au, 
|> > commercial entity for .com.au, NFP for .org.au, etc) should not be 
|> > lifted. The current requirements are working well.
|> > 
|> > - What commercial entities that need a .com.au wouldn't 
|> already have 
|> > an ACN/ABN?
|> 
|> overseas ones.
|> 
|> just as australian registrars sell .uk, .nz etc to 
|> australian companies that do business in uk or nz  likewise 
|> overseas companies that sell into australian want .com.au
|> 
|> even a decade ago I battled the robert elzes for access into 
|> .com.au by overseas companies and the xenophobia refuses to die.
|> 

I consider what you want here as a dillution of the namespace.  If we allow
entities without a clear presence in Australia, then it means the .com.au
namespace can be used by anyone.  I see value in the namespace being reserved
for those with a real presence here.

It is easy enough for international traders to establish a presence and comply
with the rules.  Making it easier for them doesn't mean it is better.

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch